用HELR的方法分析的一道因果题感觉不太对 放到这里来问问

sunyuwei

Lymedisease is caused by a bacterium transmitted to humans by deer ticks.  Generally, deer ticks pick up the bacteriumwhile in the larval stage by feeding on infected white-footed mice.  However, certain other species on which thelarvae feed do not harbor the bacterium. If the population of these other species were increased, more of the larvaewould be feeding on uninfected hosts, so the number of ticks acquiring thebacterium would likely decline. Whichof the following would it be most important to ascertain in evaluating theargument? A.Whether populations of the other species on which deer tick larvae feed arefound only in areas also inhabited by white-footed mice B.Whether the size of the deer tick population is currently limited by theavailability of animals for the tick's larval stage to feed on C.Whether the infected deer tick population could be controlled by increasing thenumber of animals that prey on white-footed mice D.Whether deer ticks that were not infected as larvae can become infected asadults by feeding on deer on which infected deer ticks have fed E.Whether the other species on which deer tick larvae feed harbor any otherbacteria that ticks transmit to humans

答案是B  我认为是D

我的分析如下：
这里的因是：其他的物种数量增加
果是：感染细菌的的鹿虱的数量减少（这里没有提及是成年还是幼虫时期）

此时我承认他的因，但是切断因果之间的联系，提出还有另一种方法可以使鹿虱受感染，即：幼虫期未被感染的鹿虱是否会在成年期通过寄生在有染病鹿虱寄生的鹿身上而受到感染。使文章结论得到削弱，我不知道这个逻辑哪里有问题，对于因果联系的CQ需要和因相关吗？还请指教~

sunyuwei

DDDDDDDDDDD